Tucker Convertible on Ebay

[Tatra Man]

Streamliner,

Great observations about the design room and body #57 being in the same location of the factory. Also the fact that the same men are featured in both the design room photo and next to the clay buck.

I never noticed the double fins on the back of the Tremulis proposal until you posted the original photo of the clay model. The double fins are now also apparent to me in the March 2 advertisement illustration. Really interesting. Do you have any other views of the model you can share?

I, too, would love to know who all of those men standing with Alex Tremulis next to the clay buck are. Are they engineers? Other designers? Mr. Tammen and Mr. Dennison? Does anyone know?

[Tucker Fan 48]

So here it is, Easter Sunday, and no big Blue Easter Egg. Inquiring minds want to know, what the heck is the difference.

[Phantomrig]

So here it is, Easter Sunday, and no big Blue Easter Egg. Inquiring minds want to know, what the heck is the difference.

I need to know so bad it hurts.

[TUCKER]

Where is the big blue "Easter Egg" I have been trying to win?

[john]

Will someone please paste the pictures of the Mystery Tucker and the big back window Tucker here from the Tucker on e-bay, pictures on page 6.

Will post our findings of the difference between the two that we noticed,
Tried for an hour to cut and paste them here.
Thanks, John

[TuckerCar]

16.jpg (113.89 KiB) Viewed 1370 times

tuckeroriginal1970pic.jpg (634.16 KiB) Viewed 1365 times

[john]

TuckerCar,
Thank you sooooo much for pasting the pictures.
Figured a clean site topic area might be best as So much has been written about this car.

Do so hope that the replies "pertain" to this topic only, hope it does not get cluttered with anything that does not have use as information and opinion about discussing the post at hand.

Do enjoy all of the club posters, lots of intelligence and reasonable thinking.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:50 PM
Subject: Do wish to thank all that posted what their thoughts were regarding the Mystery Tucker picture and the Big back window Tucker

We had passed by the obvious difference on far too many occasions, when we realized the importance of this fact, this, together with numerous other more serious issues made us walk away.
When comparing the two pictures;

A-Yes, one is the big back window tucker, to our best knowledge #57,

B-Yes, one is the mystery Tucker, to our best knowledge #57 again,

C-Yes, the Tucker sold recently, to our best knowledge through personally inspecting the serial number and having a police official verify it in writing, #57 again.

There have many claims and opinions posted herein and on the internet, and this car (57), has been disputed, argued and it is still not resolved in full.

One SURGERY is brought forth, for this one point, from our research on #57
This one point we will be bringing forth shall be left up to the posters here to finalize in conclusion.
We say solving one of the claims;
this meaning that any logically thinking person and any reasonable person will have to contemplate and decide for themselves if the two cars are one in the same,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AS THE STORIES GO;
#57 was built as a special 4 door body for possible future use as a new style and a New Year release.

#57 is shown quite well as being real at this stage, picture above,

A Tucker Car, (quote), was noted by Preston’s son as having the roof cut off, was this # 57,

If so, what happened to the roof, was it put aside for future use, one might explain it away by saying this,

PLEASE remember that the Tucker the previous owner had, has #57 stamped heavily into its cowl, frame and a front body panel.

Were other parts, doors, fenders and an assortment of other body panels stamped #57 also?

#57 ( big back window) at this time was far from being complete, and as the picture displays this #57 was not painted.

It would have had to been assembled, welded, leaded, sealed , primed and made laser straight for paint, so WE ASSUME, a logically thinking person would discount this as not possible or reasonable.

IN ESSENCE;

WHY GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS TO TEAR AND CUT IT APART, LOGICALLY WE ASSUME IT WAS NEVER PAINTED OR ASSEMBLED.

With this known in logical and reasonable theory, what happened to the rest of #57, are the current claims correct,

WITH THIS IN MIND;
The mystery Tucker picture,

Yes, this is claimed to be #57,

Yes, this is what the prior owner claimed to us as what he purchased in the early 70’s as being #57

Yes, streamliner, tucker, tuckeroo and many others, your guessing was correct in many ways, there are in fact differences in some body stampings, welds are slightly different and a host of other posters thoughts were correct also, that’s our opinion on their postings, great work actually.

These subtle points in themselves are not convincing enough though to a logically thinking average person or historian, nor were they to us!!

These points can be argued until the end of time.

Soooo, to gather more;

#57 was shown as auctioned at the federal liquidation sale,

#57 was noted herein the site as being seen at Ezra’s

#57 has been noted as secreted away at Lenki’s, logically thinking, never auctioned or accounted for,

WITH this said, where did it go?????
We are here, through promise to the club and many persons that have posted, to post our one logical and reasonable explanation of this one point, are the two one in the same as posted herein and written everywhere????

We stated numerous times that it was Obvious, but yet, we ourselves, passed this one strong point by 100’s of times as not being relevant.
BUT, it is very relevant to what’s being said,

Any logically and reasonably thinking person or historian will have to form their own opinion, what we are giving you is a strong point to form your conclusion, are the two Tuckers, one in the same.

Now for the obvious that has been overlooked, thanks again to all the coooool people that have posted replies.
With everything written above and in the best form of explanation we could derive at,



THE BLUE EASTER EGG CLUE WE GAVE;
Why is the rocker panel on the #57 Mystery Tucker sealed, primed and painted Blue????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Why is the big back windows car not sealeed, primed and painted?????

PLEASE>>>> remember what was fully written above>>>>>>

With this said, is their any reasonable or logical point anyone can make to display that they are one in the same ???????????????
Just does not make any sense does it, seems it defies any and all logic ????????

With this said, let the games really begin, as it may be, through your own rational conclusion, a new bag of worms have spewed out !!!!!
IF you form the conclusion that they are not one in the same, what happened and what do we do?

John

[TUCKER]

.

[TUCKER]

Hi do anyone know where is the frame of 1027 ??? 1027 used to be the color this mystery frame is painted and I know the 1027 car have frame 1052 with many panels from 1027 and 1018. Where is the blue 1027 frame???

[john]

Guys,
I tried my best to get it posted, IT WAS ready for post but I could not get the dam pictures pated over, SORRY.

By the way, look at the DATE on the new post, it confirms my readiness.

PLEASE post, in the new topic arae, if you think they are one in the same.
ALSO, it was obvious, but as mentioned numerous times, we let it go not realizing what it did to the current day story>>

ENJOY GUYS,
John

[john]

Told you it would be obvious, just obscure in a way.
BUT, quite problomatic, huh?

Please, lets all try and stay away from the R word used above, OK?

Tuckerfan, Phontomrig, Tucker car, Tucker, Tommy, ehartman13, John Dore, Tucker fan 48, Plancor 792, Tin Goose, Preston, Leadleader and a host of others.

IS THE MYSTERY PICTURE THE SAME CAR AS THE BIG BACK WINDOW CAR???????

Shall we cross that bridge in discussion here first.
John

[TUCKER]

So where is the frame for 1027 ? I see they sold many panels with frame 1052 and they even had blueprints to make a convertible along with this car. Did the frame end up in the mystery Tucker parts lot after puting together the 1027/1052 part lot?

[Tommy]

What a gyp. I said none of the body panels looked the same. I thought I was going to hear something new.

Apparently Allen Reinert himself said when he acquired the car it was basically a frame with a cowl tack-welded in place, two front doors and two rear quarter panels. Mr.Reinert got a bunch more parts from Mr.Gilliland when his tractor trailer tipped over after buying a whole bunch of parts that used to belong to Mr. Schlipf. Mr.Reinert scavenged for parts from all over even before that. Who knows where the blue rocker panel came from. There are a ton of parts in the mystery Tucker picture that are not in the big back window picture. One of things thats SUPPOSED to be the same is the stamped cowl and that could be, you cant tell from these pictures that its not. It has to be obvious to everyone that most of the parts are not the same, not just a rocker panel. The question is which parts ARE the same and out of those parts what was modified to be a convertiblie and more importantly WHEN and WHERE and by WHO.

Well what a let down, I am going back to welding on my project car.

[Phantomrig]

This is by far the most interesting thing I know of on the internet right now, and I feel very priveledged to be here as it happens.

[TUCKER]

We all know it is not 1057 but just many parts from all over put together over the years. I see nothing the same on the big window Tucker and the convertible Tucker. The real 1057 with the big back window may still be somewhere out there. that 57 stamped on the panels don't look to mean much. Why would they have to stamp the hood, trunk, and other parts with that 57? Was it so the parts wont get lost mixed with other car parts? Also why is the number from the frame not shown in the photos of the numbers?? It is not 57 but 1057 which have to read on the frame. Just what I believe but I may be wrong.

Also that 57 can be the stamp from the inspector of the parts like I have seen on other old 1940s cars where they stamp a number into the metal or with paint on the body panels.

When you don't have a car Title on an old car you buy and you take it to DOT to get a new title what they look for is a complete number on the frame and/or body like 1057 not 57. They will not take 57. On Tuckers the body number and serial numbers had 4 numbers.